Towards a Methodology for Ontology Based Model Engineering

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Towards a Methodology for Ontology Based Model Engineering Towards a methodology for ontology based model engineering Nicola Guarino and Christopher Welty† LADSEB/CNR Padova, Italy {guarino,welty}@ladseb.pd.cnr.it http://www.ladseb.pd.cnr.it/infor/ontology/ontology.html Phone: +39 049 829 57 51 Fax: +39 049 829 57 63 † on sabbatical from Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY Abstract The Formal Tools of Ontological Analysis The philosophical discipline of Ontology is evolving towards an engineering discipline, and in this evolution the Our methodology is based on four fundamental ontologi- need for a principled methodology has clearly arisen. In cal notions, which will be discussed in this section: identity, this paper, we briefly discuss our recent work towards devel- unity, rigidity, and dependence. We shall represent the oping a methodology for ontology-based model engineering. behavior of a property with respect to these notions by This methodology builds on previous methodology efforts, means of a set of meta-properties. Our goal is to show how and is founded on important analytic notions that have been these meta-properties impose some constraints on the way drawn from Philosophy and adapted to Engineering: identity, subsumption is used to model a domain. unity, rigidity, and dependence. We demonstrate how these techniques can be used to analyze properties, which clarifies many misconceptions about taxonomies and helps bring substantial order to ontologies. Preliminaries Let’s assume we have a first-order language L0 (the model- Introduction ing language) whose intended domain is the world to be modeled, and another first order language (the meta-lan- Ontologies are becoming increasingly popular in prac- L1 tice, and the number of poor quality ontologies have made guage) whose constant symbols are the predicates of L0. clear the need for a principled methodology for building Our meta-properties will be represented by predicate sym- them. Perhaps the most common problem we have seen in bols of L1. Primitive meta-properties will correspond to practice with ontologies is that, while they are expected to axiom schemes of L0. When a certain axiom scheme holds bring order and structure to information, their taxonomic in L0 for a certain property, then the corresponding meta- structure is often poor and confusing. This is typically property holds in L1. This correspondence can be seen as a exemplified by the unrestrained use of subsumption to system of reflection rules between L and L , which allow accomplish a variety of reasoning and representation tasks. 0 1 us to define a particular meta-property in our meta-lan- For example, in previous work (Guarino, 1999) several unclear uses of the is-a relation in existing ontologies were guage, avoiding a second-order logical definition. Meta- identified, such as: properties will be used as analysis tools to characterize the ontological nature of properties in L0, and will always be 1. a physical object is an amount of matter (Pangloss) defined with respect to a given conceptualization. 2. an amount of matter is a physical object (WordNet) We shall denote primitive meta-properties by bolded let- This striking dissimilarity poses a difficult integration prob- ters preceded by the sign “+”, “-” or “~” corresponding to lem, since the standard approach of generalizing overlap- carrying the meta-property, not carrying the meta-property, ping concepts would not work, and shows that even the and anti the meta-property. The latter will be used to denote most experienced modelers need some guidance for using special restrictions that are stronger than the simple nega- subsumption consistently. tion, and will be described in more detail, when relevant, In this paper we show how a rigorous analysis of the for each meta-property. We use the notation φM to indicate ontological meta-properties of taxonomic nodes can help φ using the subsumption relation in a disciplined way. These that the property has the meta-property M. meta-properties are based on the philosophical notions of We shall furthermore adopt a first order logic with iden- rigidity, identity, unity, and dependence. They impose some tity. This will be occasionally extended to a simple tempo- constraints on the subsumption relation that clarify many ral logic, where all predicates are temporally indexed by misconceptions about taxonomies – misconceptions that means of an extra argument. If the time argument is omitted normally turn taxonomies into a tangled mess. We discuss for a certain predicate φ, then the predicate is assumed to be these misconceptions by means of real examples, and show time invariant, that is ∃tφ()xt, →∀t φ()xt, . Note that the how our analysis can bring true order to taxonomies, facili- identity relation will be assumed as time invariant: if two tating their understanding, comparison and integration. things are identical, they are identical forever. This means This is a first step towards a general methodology for ontol- that Leibniz’s rule holds with no exceptions. ogy-driven conceptual analysis (ODCA) which combines the established tradition of formal ontology in Philosophy We also adopt a time-indexed mereological relation with the needs of information systems design. P(x,y,t), meaning that x is a (proper or improper) part of y at time t, satisfying the minimal set of axioms and definitions change, and which must not? And how can we reidentify an (adapted from (Simons, 1987), p. 362) shown in Table 1. instance of a certain property after some time? The former issue leads to the notion of rigidity, discussed below, while ∧ ¬ = (proper part) PP(x,y,t) =def f(x,y,t) x y the latter is related to the distinction between synchronic ∃ ∧ O(x,y,t) =def z(P(z,x,t) P(z,y,t)) (overlap) and diachronic identity. An extensive analysis of these P(x,y,t) → E(x,t) ∧ E(y,t) (actual existence of parts) issues in the context of conceptual modeling has been made P(x,y,t) ∧ P(y,x,t) → x=y (antisymmetry) elsewhere (Guarino & Welty, 2000b). P(x,y,t) ∧ P(y,z,t) → P(x,z,t) (transitivity) Finally, it is important to note that, while we use exam- PP(x,y,t) → ∃z(PP(z,y,t) ∧ ¬O(z,x,t)) (weak supplementation) ples to clarify the notions central to our analysis, the exam- ples are not the point of this paper. The everyday use of Table 1. Axiomatization of the part relation. these analysis tools ultimately depend on the assumptions Our domain of quantification will be that of possibilia. resulting from our conceptualization of the world (Guarino, That is, the extension of predicates will not be limited to 1998). For example, the decision as to whether a cat what exists in the actual world, but to what exists in any remains the same cat after it loses its tail, or whether a possible world (Lewis, 1983). For example, a predicate like statue is identical with the marble it is made of, are ulti- “Unicorn” will not be empty in our world, although no mately the result of our sensory system, our culture, etc. instance has actual existence there. Actual existence is The aim of the present analysis is to clarify the formal tools therefore different from existential quantification (“logical that can both make such assumptions explicit, and reveal existence”), and will be represented by the temporally the logical consequences of them. When we say, e.g. that indexed predicate E(x,t), meaning that x has actual exist- “having the same fingerprint” may be considered an iden- ence at time t (Hirst, 1991). tity criterion for PERSON, we do not mean to claim this is the universal identity criterion for PERSONs, but that if this Finally, in order to avoid trivial cases in our meta-prop- were to be taken as an identity criterion in some conceptu- erty definitions, we shall implicitly assume the property alization, what would that mean for the property, for its variables as restricted to discriminating properties instances, and its relationships to other properties? (Guarino, Carrara & Giaretta, 1994), i.e. properties P such that ¸∃xP() x ∧¸∃xP¬()x. Rigidity The Basic Notions A rigid property has been defined in (Guarino, Carrara & The notion of identity is at the core of our methodology. Giaretta, 1994) as a property that necessarily holds for all Despite its fundamental importance in Philosophy, it has its instances. For example, we normally think of PERSON been slow in making its way into the practice of conceptual as rigid; if x is an instance of PERSON, it must be an modeling, although it has been recognized from time to instance of PERSON in every possible world. The STU- time by various communities. In object-oriented languages, DENT property, on the other hand, is normally not rigid; we for example, uniquely identifying an object (as a collection can easily imagine an entity moving in and out of the STU- of data) is critical, in particular when a system has persis- DENT property while being the same individual. This tence or distributed components (Wieringa, De Jonge & notion was later refined in (Guarino, 1998), as shown in Spruit, 1994). In databases, globally unique id’s have been Table 2, where the notion of anti-rigidity was added to gain introduced into most commercial systems to address this φ is a necessary property for all its Rigid φ+R issue. These solutions approach the notion of identity we instances use here, but do not account for it completely, as they Non- φ is not a necessary property of all its merely provide a framework for identifying unique descrip- φ-R Rigid instances tions and not for understanding the nature of the identity φ relationship that holds among the entities they describe.
Recommended publications
  • Out of Sorts? Remedies for Theories of Object
    Out of Sorts? Some Remedies for Theories of Object Concepts: A Reply to Rhemtulla and Xu Sergey V. Blok University of Texas at Austin George E. Newman Yale University Lance J. Rips Northwestern University Psychological Review, in press. Out of Sorts? / 2 Abstract Concepts of individual objects (e.g., a favorite chair or pet) include knowledge that allows people to identify these objects, sometimes after long stretches of time. In an earlier article, we set out experimental findings and mathematical modeling to support the view that judgments of identity depend on people’s beliefs about the causal connections that unite an object’s earlier and later stages. In this article, we examine Rhemtulla and Xu’s (in press) critique of the causal theory. We argue that Rhemtulla and Xu’s alternative sortal proposal is not a necessary part of identity judgments, is internally inconsistent, leads to conflicts with current theories of categories, and encounters problems explaining empirical dissociations. Previous evidence also suggests that causal factors dominate spatiotemporal continuity and perceptual similarity in direct tests. We conclude that the causal theory provides the only existing account consistent with current evidence. Keywords: Concepts Causation Sortals Object concepts Out of Sorts? / 3 Out of Sorts? Some Remedies for Theories of Object Concepts: A Reply to Rhemtulla and Xu Many objects persist over stretches of time too long for us to track perceptually. If you attend your thirtieth high school reunion, you’re bound to run into classmates like Fred Lugbagg whom you haven’t encountered since graduation and whose perceptual appearance is no more similar to the 18-year- old Lugbagg than is the appearance of most of the other males at the reunion.
    [Show full text]
  • Islamic Philosophy (PHIL 10197) Course Organiser: Fedor Benevich
    Islamic Philosophy (PHIL 10197) Course Organiser: Fedor Benevich Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Thursday 10-12am, signup via doodle at least 8hrs in advance. Course Secretary: Ann-Marie Cowe Email: [email protected] Course Description: This course will provide a systematic introduction to key issues and debates in Islamic philosophy by focusing on the medieval period and showing its relevance for contemporary philosophical discussions. It will explore the mechanisms of the critical appropriation of the Western (Greek) philosophical heritage in the Islamic intellectual tradition and the relationship between philosophy and religion in Islam. Islamic philosophy is the missing link between ancient Greek thought and the European (medieval and early modern) philosophical tradition. It offers independent solutions to many philosophical problems which remain crucial for contemporary readers. Starting with a historical overview of the most important figures and schools, this course covers central topics of Islamic philosophy, such as (the selection of topics may vary from year to year): - faith and reason - philosophy and political authority - free will and determinism (incl. the problem of evil) - scientific knowledge and empiricism - materialism (atomism) and sortal essentialism - self-awareness, personal identity, and the immateriality of soul - proofs for God's existence Primary sources will be read in English translation. Learning Outcomes: On completion of this course, the student will be able to: 1. Demonstrate knowledge of the central issues of Islamic philosophy 2. Analyse materials independently and critically engage with other interpretations 3. Provide systematic exposition and argumentation for their views 4. Demonstrate understanding of a non-Western intellectual tradition Topics and Readings: Week 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Modal Conventionalism in the Real World
    Linguistic Modal Conventionalism in the Real World Clare Due A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of The Australian National University March 2018 © Clare Due 2018 Statement This thesis is solely the work of its author. No part of it has previously been submitted for any degree, or is currently being submitted for any other degree. To the best of my knowledge, any help received in preparing this thesis, and all sources used, have been duly acknowledged. Word count: 88164 Clare Due 7th March 2018 Acknowledgements I am deeply grateful to Daniel Nolan for the years of support he has given me while writing this thesis. His supervision has always been challenging yet encouraging, and I have benefited greatly from his insight and depth of knowledge. His kindness and empathy also played a large role in making a difficult process much easier. My second supervisor, Alan Hájek, agreed to take me on late in my program, and has been enormously generous with his time and help since. The community of philosophers at the Australian National University provides the perfect combination of intellectual development, friendship and personal support. I consider myself very privileged to have had the opportunity to be part of that community. My research has benefited from feedback both written and verbal from many ANU philosophers, including Daniel Stoljar, Frank Jackson, Jessica Isserow, Edward Elliott, Don Nordblom, Heather Browning and Erick Llamas. I would like to offer particular thanks to Alexander Sandgren. I learned an enormous amount during the first years of my program, and a great deal of it was in conversation with Alex.
    [Show full text]
  • Just What Is the Relation Between the Manifest and the Scientific Images? Comments on Brandom
    Just What is the Relation between the Manifest and the Scientific Images? Comments on Brandom I. Introduction The last half of the (long) first chapter of Brandom’s From Empiricism to Expressivism constitutes an extended argument against one half of Wilfrid Sellars’s version of scientific realism. I say ‘half’ of Sellarsian scientific realism because Brandom agrees with Sellars’s anti-instrumentalism. The half Brandom takes issue with is Sellars’s claim that the “scientific image” [SI] —an idealized, complete scientific framework for the description and explanation of all natural events and objects—possesses such ontological priority over the “manifest image” [MI]—itself an idealization of the ‘commonsense’ framework of persons and things in terms of which we currently experience ourselves and the world—that it will come to replace the MI in all matters of explanation and description. Brandom’s argument against this Sellarsian idea is rather roundabout. First, he traces Sellars’s distinction between the MI and the SI back to the Kantian distinction between phenomena and noumena. Then he argues against several attempts to understand identity claims across disparate frameworks. Neither, claims Brandom, will permit us to identify objects across the MI/SI divide. But if we cannot identify the objects of concern across the frameworks, then a shift from the MI to the SI is not a form of replacement of one framework by a better, but simply a change of subject that poses no threat to the MI. The overall argument of the chapter is that, though what Sellars made of the Kantian notion of a category is a very Good Idea, Sellars’s assimilation of scientific realism to a kind of transcendental realism in Kant’s sense, is a Bad Idea with a muddled basis and unworkable consequences.
    [Show full text]
  • P(X)]( Y Exists(Y)]) = 9X Snow(X)
    Existential sentences without existential quanti cation Louise McNally Universitat Pomp eu Fabra 1. Intro duction 1 In a chapter on existence statements in Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics, Strawson makes the following observation: we can...admit the p ossibility of another formulation of existentially quanti ed statement[s], and, with it, the p ossibility of another use of the word `exists'....We can, that is to say, reconstrue every such quanti ed prop osition as a sub ject-predicate prop osition in whichthe sub ject is a prop erty or concept and in which the predicate declares, or denies, its instantiation. (Strawson 1959:241) In other words, there are twoways to express a prop osition whose truth entails the existence of some token entity (or particular, to use Strawson's terminology). Supp ose we take the following there-existential sentence as an example: (1) There was snow. We might, mo difying slightly the analysis in Barwise and Co op er 1981, inter- pret There was as an existence predicate and snow as an existential quanti er over particulars (represented logically in (2)): (2) P [9x[snow(x) ^ P (x)](y [exists(y )]) = 9x[snow(x) ^ exists(x)] Alternatively,we might (essentially equivalently) interpret Therewasas if it were synonymous with the predicate to be instantiated, a predicate that holds of expressions interpreted as prop erties or as what Strawson calls nonparticulars, e.g. as in (3)a. Presumably,itwould b e true that the snow-prop erty is instantiated i some particular, one that is a quantity of snow, exists (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Formalizing Ontological Commitments
    From: AAAI-94 Proceedings. Copyright © 1994, AAAI (www.aaai.org). All rights reserved. Formalizing Ontological Commitments Nicola Guarino Massimiliano Carrara Pierdaniele Giaretta LADSEB-CNR, National Research Council, Viale Ungheria, 43a Institute of History of Philosophy, Corso Stati Uniti, 4 I-37046 Minerbe (VR) University of Padova, I-35127 Padova, Italy Italy Piazza Capitaniato, 3 [email protected] I-35100 Padova, Italy Abstract purposes, since we want to include in the commitment Formalizing the ontological commitment of a logical lan- some basic assumptions and distinctions presupposed by guage means offering a way to specify the intended meaning the theory. of its vocabulary by constraining the set of its models, giv- In the AI community, the above position is at the basis ing explicit information about the intended nature of the of current projects for knowledge sharing and reuse modelling primitives and their a priori relationships. We (Neches et al. 1991). In the knowledge acquisition litera- present here a formal definition of ontological commitment ture, the notion of ontological commitment has been intro- which aims to capture the very basic ontological assump- duced by Gruber (1993-1994) as an agreement to use a tions about the intended domain, related to issues such as sli,ared vocabukary specification: such a specification is a identity and internal structure. To tackle such issues, a set of terminological ‘axioms, <and ontological commitment modal framework endowed with mereo-topological primi- amounts to syntactical consistency with such axioms. This tives has been adopted. The paper is mostly based on a re- syntactical notion does not fit our intuitions, since it seems visitation of philosophical (and linguistic) literature in the natural to allow two different vocabularies (using English perspective of knowledge representation.
    [Show full text]
  • DICTIONARY of PHILOSOPHY This Page Intentionally Left Blank
    A DICTIONARY OF PHILOSOPHY This page intentionally left blank. A Dictionary of Philosophy Third edition A.R.Lacey Department of Philosophy, King’s College, University of London First published in 1976 by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd Second edition 1986 Third edition 1996 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” © A.R.Lacey 1976, 1986, 1996 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Lacey, A.R. A dictionary of philosophy.—3rd edn. 1. Philosophy—Dictionaries I. Title 190′.3′21 B41 ISBN 0-203-19819-0 Master e-book ISBN ISBN 0-203-19822-0 (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 0-415-13332-7 (Print Edition) Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available on request Preface to the first edition This book aims to give the layman or intending student a pocket encyclopaedia of philosophy, one with a bias towards explaining terminology. The latter task is not an easy one since philosophy is regularly concerned with concepts which are unclear.
    [Show full text]
  • Metaphysics and Biology a Critique of David Wiggins' Account of Personal
    ORBIT-OnlineRepository ofBirkbeckInstitutionalTheses Enabling Open Access to Birkbeck’s Research Degree output Metaphysics and biology a critique of David Wiggins’ account of personal identity https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40062/ Version: Full Version Citation: Ferner, Adam M. (2014) Metaphysics and biology a critique of David Wiggins’ account of personal identity. [Thesis] (Unpublished) c 2020 The Author(s) All material available through ORBIT is protected by intellectual property law, including copy- right law. Any use made of the contents should comply with the relevant law. Deposit Guide Contact: email M E T A P H Y S I C S A N D B I O L O G Y A CRITIQUE OF DAVID WIGGINS’ ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL IDENTITY ADAM M. FERNER BIRKBECK COLLEGE, UNIVERSITY OF LONDON. SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. FEBRUARY 2014 1 ABSTRACT Over his philosophical career, David Wiggins has produced a body of work that, though varied and wide-ranging, stands as a coherent and carefully integrated whole. Its parts cannot be studied in isolation, and a central aim of this thesis is to examine how three vital elements of his systematic metaphysics interconnect: his conceptualist-realism, his sortal theory ‘D’, and his account of personal identity – his human being theory. Yet critics murder to dissect, and Wiggins’ project is often unfairly decomposed into its parts. Thus, this study aims both to introduce his thoughts without neglecting the relations between them, and to rectify the various misinterpretations of them by – among others – Paul Snowdon, Eric Olson and Lynne Rudder Baker. In clarifying and exploring these connections another sunken, yet central, vein is revealed.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Readings About Sortal Logic. This Topic Has Two Different Strands
    Some readings about Sortal Logic. This topic has two different strands. One is the “philosophy of language and metaphysics” direction wherein the whole notion of a sortal is justified and a bunch of claims concerning sortals are made. The other concerns the topic of a “logic for sortals” and the “formal semantics of sortals”. Although one can understand the first without knowing or caring about the second, it is difficult to do it the other way around, since a condition on the adequacy of a sortal logic is that it give a formal account of the intuitions generated in the first strand. Sortals in Philosophy of Language and Metaphysics: There are a huge number of readings here, and I will mention only a few that I know of. This hit its heyday in the 1960s and 1970s, but as you will see in the literature below there has been a recent upsurge of interest. All studies in the topic should start with Peter Strawson’s Individuals (1959), especially Part II. Everyone also should read at least parts of Peter Geach’s Reference and Generality (1962). In a later collection of Geach’s papers there are a lot of articles that are related, especially those on “relative identity”…a topic that many people think is inextricably bound to sortals. Mei, Tsu-Lin (1961) “Subject and Predicate, A Grammatical Preliminary” Phil. Rev. 70: 153- 175. Wiggins, David (2001) Sameness and Substance Renewed (revised version of earlier Sameness and Substance (1980), which was a much expanded version of Sameness and Substance (1967).) Noonan, H.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Carnap's Conventionalism
    CARNAP'S CONVENTIONALISM: LOGIC, SCIENCE, AND TOLERANCE Noah Friedman-Biglin A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews 2014 Full metadata for this item is available in St Andrews Research Repository at: http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/ Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10023/6334 This item is protected by original copyright This item is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence Carnap's Conventionalism: Logic, Science, and Tolerance Noah Friedman-Biglin This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree of PhD at the University of St Andrews December 16th, 2013 Declarations Candidate's Declarations: I, Noah Friedman-Biglin, hereby certify that this thesis, which is approximately 75,000 words in length, has been written by me, that it is the record of work carried out by me and that it has not been submitted in any previous applica- tion for a higher degree. I was admitted as a research student in September, 2009 and as a candidate for this degree in May, 2010; the higher study for which this is a record was carried out in the University of St Andrews between 2009 and 2013. Date: 16 December, 2013 Signature: Supervisor's Declaration: I hereby certify that the candidate has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution and Regulations appropriate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Uni- versity of St Andrews and that the candidate is qualified to submit this thesis in application for that degree. Date: 16 December, 2013 Signature: Permission for Electronic Thesis Publication: In submitting this thesis to the University of St Andrews I understand that I am giving permission for it to be made available for use in accordance with the regulations of the University Library for the time being in force, subject to any copyright vested in the work not being affected thereby.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy 203: History of Modern Western Philosophy Spring 2014
    Philosophy 203: History of Modern Western Philosophy Hamilton College Spring 2014 Russell Marcus Class #14 - Identity and the Self Locke, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding Book II, Chapter XXVII (AW 367-377) I. The Mind-Body Problem While Locke was suspected of Hobbesian materialism, he is actually a dualist, accepting the existence of the soul and God, as well as material objects. So Locke, like Descartes, is saddled with a mind-body problem. The slight metaphysical differences between Locke and Descartes do nothing to change the essential nature of the problem. Given what Locke says about the primary qualities, we can see that bodies have several essential properties, not merely extension. Similarly, minds are not essentially thinking; they are just the kinds of things that do think. Still, nothing in these changes in the characterizations of each substance mitigates the problem. Locke does not provide a Cartesian-style solution to the mind-body problem, despairing of any satisfactory account. His discussion of mind-body interaction is humble, though, rather than skeptical. Supposing the sensation or idea we name whiteness be produced in us by a certain number of globules, which, having a verticity about their own centres, strike upon the retina of the eye, with a certain degree of rotation, as well as progressive swiftness; it will hence easily follow, that the more the superficial parts of any body are so ordered as to reflect the greater number of globules of light, and to give them the proper rotation, which is fit to produce this sensation of white in us, the more white will that body appear, that from an equal space sends to the retina the greater number of such corpuscles, with that peculiar sort of motion..
    [Show full text]
  • Persons—Their Identity and Individuation
    Persons—Their Identity and Individuation Roger Melin SWEDISH SCIENCE PRESS, UPPSALA, SWEDEN Roger Melin PERSONS—THEIR IDENTITY AND INDIVIDUATION Umeå, 1998 Institutionen för filosofi och vetenskapsteori Umeå universitet 901 87 Umeå Akademisk avhandling som med vederbörligt tillstånd av rektorämbetet vid Umeå universitet för avläggande av filosofie doktorsexamen offentligen försvaras i Hörsal F, Humanisthust fredagen den 27 november 1998 kl. 13.15. ISBN 91-7191-519-2 ISSN 0345-0155 ABSTRACT This study is about the nature of persons and personal identity. It belongs to a tradition that maintains that in order to understand what it is to be a person we must clarify what personal identity consists in. In this pursuit, I differentiate between the problems (i) How do persons persist? and (ii) What facts, if any, does personal identity consist in? In chapters 2-3,1 discuss matters related to the first question. In chapter 2,1 discuss 'identity' and 'criterion of identity'. I argue that we ought to understand 'identity' as numerical identity. A 'criterion of identity', I argue, should be understood as a specification of the essential conditions for being an object of some sort S. In chapter 3,1 distinguish between two different accounts of how persons persist; the endurance view (persons persist three-dimensionally through time), and the perdurance view (persons persist four-dimensionally in virtue of having numerically distinct temporal parts). I argue that the endurance view of persons is ontologically prior to the perdurance view; on the ground that objects must always be individuated under some substance sortal concept S (the sortal dependency of individuation), and that the concept person entails that objects falling under it are three-dimensional.
    [Show full text]